Allowed

K.Deepa v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Nov 2012WP(C)/2549/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the writ petition challenging the endorsement of regular appointment on a daily wage basis, quashing the limited approval and directing regular service approval with pay scale, subject to an undertaking to reimburse salary if a Supreme Court appeal succeeds.

What did the court decide?

Ext. P1 quashed to the extent of daily wage approval; regular approval granted with pay scale upon undertaking to reimburse salary if SLP allowed.

K.Deepa Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/30TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 2549 of 2012 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S): -------------

¶7

K.DEEPA, AGED 33 YEARS, AGED 33 YEARS, WIFE OF REMESH, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL ASSISTANT, SREEMANA VIKRAMA AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL; KAPPIL, WANDOOR EDUCATION SUB DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶10

THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM-679 328.

¶11

THE MANAGER, SREEMANA VIKRAMA AIDED UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, KAPPIL, WANDOOR EDUCATION SUB DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679328.

¶12

R1 & R2 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.T.LILLY

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

DSV/-

¶15

WP(C).No. 2549 of 2012 (P)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

¶18

EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 5/6/2006 AND THE APPROVAL THEREOF DATED 16/11/2010.

¶19

EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE MANAGER DATED NIL.

¶20

EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.169/04/G.EDN.OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 15/6/2004.

¶21

EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.49229/L3/06/GE OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 25/5/2007.

¶22

EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F4/34993/2009/DPI DATED 14/8/2009.

¶23

EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.14002/H2/06/G.EDN.OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 5/4/2009.

¶24

EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.104/2008/G.EDN.OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 10/6/2008.

¶25

EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CON.CASE (C)NO.1002/2009 DATED 12.03.2010.

¶26

EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.35002/2010-A DATED 1/12/2010.

¶27

EXHIBIT P10: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.56/11/G.EDN.OF THE GOVERNMENT DATED 26/2/2011.

¶28

EXHIBIT P11: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.40873/J2/2011/G.EDN.OF THE GOVT. DATED 20/8/2011.

¶29

EXHIBIT P12: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.15461/2010-G DATED 10/11/2011.

¶30

EXHIBIT P14: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)NO.20888 OF 2012-I DATED 10.09.2012.

¶31

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

// TRUE COPY //

P.A. TO JUDGE

DSV/-

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶36

¶37

W.P. (C) No. 2549 of 2012

¶38

¶39

Dated, this the 21^st day of November, 2012

¶40

JUDGMENT

¶41

The petitioner, who was appointed as 'UPSA' vide Ext.P1 order against a regular vacancy, challenges the endorsement of the 2^nd respondent on Ext. P1, approving her appointment from '17.07.2006 to 31.03.2007 ' only on the daily wage basis and on regular basis from 01.06.2007, and seeks for a direction to approve the service w.e.f. 17.07.2006 on Scale of pay.

¶42

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, in the light of Exts. P9 and P12 judgments of this Court, the petitioner is entitled to succeed. In the above judgments, the principles laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in Unni Narayanan vs. State of Kerala (2009(2) KLT 604), have been relied upon. In Exts. P9 and P12 judgments, this Court relied upon the earlier judgments of this Court and there was a direction that the judgment of the Division Bench in Unni

¶43

Narayan's case (cited supra) will be implemented and approval can be granted to the petitioner therein on

¶44

W.P.(C) No. 2549 of 2012

¶45

: 2 :

¶46

submitting an undertaking that in the event of the Special Leave Petitions being allowed, salary will be reimbursed to the Government.

¶47

In the said circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in the writ petition. This writ petition is allowed and Ext. P1, to the extent approval is granted only on daily wage basis for the relevant period mentioned therein, is quashed. The petitioner will be granted approval on regular basis on the scale of pay, on giving an ' undertaking' that, in the event of the Special Leave Petitions challenging the judgment of this Court in Unni Narayanan v. State of Kerala ( 2009(2) KLT 604 ) are allowed, the petitioner will reimburse the amount drawn as salary. Appropriate orders shall be issued within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the monetary benefits, less the amount

¶48

already drawn, shall be disbursed accordingly.

¶49

sd/-

¶50

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶51

kmd

¶52

/True copy/

¶53

P.A. to Judge

K.Deepa v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Deepa v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suseela.K Vs the State of Kerala

Karayi Gopalan Vs Director General,Cisf

Seetha R Vs Kollam Corporation

St.Mary Davis Vs the State of Kerala

Sudheesh S.Panicker Vs the State of Kerala and Others

Shiby Paul Vs the State of Kerala